Current Events > are the people outraged at cuties aware that its supposed to be disgusting?

(+) Yeah! (+)

the cuties thing is gross af. but its supposed to disgust you. thats the whole point of it. the maker of it is a victim of child sex abuse. she made this extreme to serve as a wake up call

this shit has been going on long before cuties was ever a thing. reality tv like toddlers & tiaras and dance moms normalized this. no one batted a eye on those shows when they were just as bad if not worse

its unreal that people cant understand this
---

Bluebomber182 posted...

this shit has been going on long before cuties was ever a thing. reality tv like toddlers & tiaras and dance moms normalized this. no one batted a eye on those shows when they were just as bad if not worse

this is true but prepare for a whole lotta qers to come in and shit on you

---

judging by all other other topics about the exact same thing, they obviously dont.

idk why you just had to make another topic instead of posting this in one of the many others.

EndOfZangoose posted...

judging by all other other topics about the exact same thing, they obviously dont.

idk why you just had to make another topic instead of posting this in one of the many others.

cause i havent seen anyone else make this argument. beating common sense into these people is needed
---

Bananana posted...

this is true but prepare for a whole lotta qers to come in and shit on you

those nutty fucks dont bother me. i pity them tbh
---

i imagine most of it is dumb people repeating the same dumb shit they see online, but that's the case with most shit like this.

its fun to watch the arguments though.

---

The "its a critique" angle is relatively new. From the beginning, it has been marketed as a positive.

Between the glamorizing American poster, the light hearted European poster,, or Netflix's description of the movie:

Eleven-year-old Amy starts to rebel against her conservative family's traditions when she becomes fascinated with a free-spirited dance crew.

None of that mentions it being a scathing attack on sexualizing girls. For a movie that people are now arguing is a critique of hypersexualizing little girls, they're marketing it like a typical story of a young girl liberating herself from her religious conservative family. May as well be treating it like Bend It Like Beckham.

Bluebomber182 posted...

cause i havent seen anyone else make this argument. beating common sense into these people is needed

I salute you my good sir.
---

Why would they have come to the conclusion that it's something beside disgusting?

---

Just because it suppose to be sickening, doesn't make it less sickening.

Ask yourself this. Would encourage your own child to be one of the actors in this movie. I think most people would say no. And that says it all.

---

parents signed off on letting their kids dance on stripper poles & do lap dances on dance moms. parents will do anything to make a quick buck even at the expense of their kids
---

The problem wasn't with the film itself, but how Netflix marketed it.

---

Cuties makes a very important sociopolitical statement, but it does so by doing the very thing it criticizes. They could've conveyed the story without literally exploiting an 11 year old in the process.

---

okay, now we're at 15 active topics about whatever the hell this is

I think once we get to like 18 I'm going to give up and look it up

Keep it in the fucking general

---

"I was only pretending to put 11 year old girls in skimpy outfits while cameras zoom in on their crotches during sexually provocative dance numbers."

Yeah sorry not buying it.

---

cjsdowg posted...

Just because it suppose to be sickening, doesn't make it less sickening.

Ask yourself this. Would encourage your own child to be one of the actors in this movie. I think most people would say no. And that says it all.

Child beauty pageants exist you know. Parents have been ok with this for decades.
---

St0rmFury posted...

Child beauty pageants exist you know. Parents have been ok with this for decades.

Are you saying child beauty pageants are okay?

Genuine confusion at the point you're going for here, not trying to antagonize you.

---

Nah.
---

Bluebomber182 posted...

reality tv like toddlers & tiaras and dance moms normalized this. no one batted a eye on those shows

Don't speak for me. I have always thought that pageants and those shows were disgusting. Am I allowed to think that about cuties now?

---

St0rmFury posted...

Child beauty pageants exist you know. Parents have been ok with this for decades.

Don't most other adults shit on those child pageants, though? I swear it seems like everytime its brought up, people voice their disgust at little girls wearing skimpy clothing and thick makeup, as well as condemning the parents for having an exploitative whatever it takes to win is fine attitude.

---

The only issue I really have against this movie is that after the campaign against video games & anime, this movie somehow gets a pass. Game characters that are supposed to be adults need to be covered up, anime characters are attacked because they look young, but ACTUAL children twerking is just fine. If this were an anime/manga, it wouldn't be nearly as bad, simply for the fact that it wouldn't have required real children to make, & even if it were, I doubt an anime like this could be unironically produced outside the context of hentai.

Worst of all, it's now become a political position, which means each side is going to dig their heel in with disregard for any actual facts.

---

darkbuster posted...

The only issue I really have against this movie is that after the campaign against video games & anime, this movie somehow gets a pass. Game characters that are supposed to be adults need to be covered up, anime characters are attacked because they look young, but ACTUAL children twerking is just fine. If this were an anime/manga, it wouldn't be nearly as bad, simply for the fact that it wouldn't have required real children to make, & even if it were, I doubt an anime like this could be unironically produced outside the context of hentai.

Worst of all, it's now become a political position, which means each side is going to dig their heel in with disregard for any actual facts.

Speaking of anime, weren't people pissed at a anime/manga for being pedobait even though the girl had massive tits?

---

LightHawKnight posted...

Speaking of anime, weren't people pissed at a anime/manga for being pedobait even though the girl had massive tits?

Pretty sure you're referring to Uzaki-chan. It's an otherwise uneventful slice of life anime about a college girl who likes to tease an intoverted guy, that got heat from her being relatively short to the extent everyone claims she looks like a child. She doesn't even cross that "500 year old loli" line.

---

darkbuster posted...

The only issue I really have against this movie is that after the campaign against video games & anime, this movie somehow gets a pass. Game characters that are supposed to be adults need to be covered up, anime characters are attacked because they look young, but ACTUAL children twerking is just fine. If this were an anime/manga, it wouldn't be nearly as bad, simply for the fact that it wouldn't have required real children to make, & even if it were, I doubt an anime like this could be unironically produced outside the context of hentai.

Worst of all, it's now become a political position, which means each side is going to dig their heel in with disregard for any actual facts.

Both of the outrage is dumb. That Uziki Chan nonsense was one of the dumbest thing I saw that somehow leaked onto the PS4 board.

---

darkbuster posted...

Pretty sure you're referring to Uzaki-chan. It's an otherwise uneventful slice of life anime about a college girl who likes to tease an intoverted guy, that got heat from her being relatively short to the extent everyone claims she looks like a child. She doesn't even cross that "500 year old loli" line.

Yeah, but doesnt big tits automatically nullify the pedobait? Since you know? Kids typically dont have big tits?

---

LightHawKnight posted...

Yeah, but doesnt big tits automatically nullify the pedobait? Since you know? Kids typically dont have big tits?

I think the idea was her short height and typical big eyed face so it was putting tits on a kid but yeah, it was incredibly dumb and one of the biggest reaches Ive seen.

---

I decided to wait for a source I trusted to cover this, and he made some decent points on the movie.

According to his assessment, while the basic story of the movie is "young girl is peer-pressured into sexualising herself, and she reaches a breaking point where she realises that this isn't for her and she's been exploited", there are scenes of these actual underage girls where the camera is focusing on their ass and crotch for seemingly no reason. It's just scenes of these girls practicing their routines or whatever and being filmed in a sexual way, for extended periods of time. That sounds pretty weird.

There's also apparently a scene where the main character has her pants pulled down in public, and there's no discretion shot or anything - you're just looking at this 13 year old actress, playing an 11 year old girl, with her panties exposed. And apparently it comes out of nowhere, or is at least seriously unexpected.

The point I ultimately took from my source is that while on the surface it can claim to be making a greater point about the sexualisation of children becoming more normalised, there are scenes which do ultimately sexualise these children in really blatant and unsettling ways. This director had these 13 year old actresses twerking and spreading their legs and shit, and she filmed these dances in a way that paid particular attention to their ass and crotch. It doesn't matter if it's meant to convey a greater point - you can make that greater point without having to constantly direct actual children to take part in activities which sexualise them. What the director did to the actresses in this movie is child exploitation.

These child actresses were paid to take part in sexualised activities, which they legally can't consent to, and these activities were recorded. To make this movie, these child actresses were exploited and sexualised, and the imagery of these children being sexualised - crotch and ass zoom-ins of 13 year old girls - is presented to the audience. Scenes depicting this aren't always tied to the plot, and are presented as-is.

One of the takeaway points made is that ultimately, at the end of the day, the only people who are going to give this movie any particular attention after the controversy dies down is MAPs. The story is apparently nothing special. It's full of sexualised imagery of children. No-one is going to revisit this movie as a strong, brave stance against child exploitation, because it is chock-full of child exploitation and it required the sexual exploitation of children to make this movie. At the end of the day, this movie seeks to profit off of the sexualisation of children.

I don't doubt that the director experienced sexual exploitation herself, but to make her movie, she had to put four or five actual children into sexualised situations, and she filmed them in ways to paint them in a sexual light. Regardless of her intended point, that's pretty abhorrent.

I think to make a piece of media that speaks out about the sexualisation of children, you don't necessarily have to depict children themselves being sexualised. South Park had an episode where all of the 4th grader girls touch up their pictures with Photoshop to sexualise themselves, and Wendy holds out until the end until she bows to peer pressure. I thought that was a great episode of South Park. It made a powerful point against the beauty standards being pushed onto children. You can have situations in media where younger characters are treated inappropriately by older people, or you could depict them in a situation where people are trying to sexualise them or where they can't escape a situation that makes them uncomfortable. You don't have to sexualise the character themselves to make a point about how younger people are often sexualised in society, or that they're exposed to things that try to prey on their insecurities and display them in a sexual light at younger ages. You don't have to sexualise actual children to make that point.

Even Little Miss Sunshine, which did depict child characters in an inappropriate light, filmed it in an ethical way - they filmed an actual child beauty pageant that was going on - and appropriately communicated how abnormal and uncomfortable it was. From how Cuties has been described to me, showing multiple 2-3 minute scenes of these 13 year old actresses twerking in spandex - occasionally removed from plot-related context - doesn't appropriately communicate how gross it is. And I don't think that the way they filmed those scenes were ethical at all.

And you can go "well the imagery is meant to be disgusting! If you take issue with this imagery and constantly talk about how sexualised it is, you're probably just a closeted pedophile for viewing it in such a heavily sexual light!" - but the fact remains that actual children were instructed to engage in sexually suggestive activities, dressed in clothing that aimed to sexualise their bodies and were filmed in a way to focus on parts of the human body that are traditionally sexualised. This movie contains actual child exploitation, with the intent of depicting underage girls through a sexualised lens, and apparently there are parts of the movie where this imagery is displayed for the sake of showing it off. The fact that they put real children through that process is questionable at best, and I would argue that it's reprehensible.

If your method of painting the sexual exploitation of minors in a negative light is to depict actual sexual exploitation of minors and let the audience decide how they want to feel, then you are creating content that appeals to people who respond to that imagery by getting horny.

And the fact that this side of the argument has become so entrenched and intertwined in a far-right conspiracy theory that Donald Trump is the only man in America who can bring pedophiles to justice is absolutely maddening, because this topic shouldn't be politicised. The right wing shouldn't be using child exploitation, sex trafficking and pedophilia as a way of promoting their political candidate, implying that the only thing standing in the way of mass child rape is Donald Trump. How the fuck did we get to a point where mass criticism of pedophilia is tied to far right conspiracy theories?

At the end of the day, I haven't seen Cuties. I saw a video from a source that I trust. He made some good points, and I'm choosing to hitch myself to that wagon. This is my understanding of the situation, and this is my take on it.

---

I had some guy explain to me that the movie was about little girls taking pics of their naked body and texting them out and it showed everything and Netflix should be burned to the ground.

Bluebomber182 posted...

this shit has been going on long before cuties was ever a thing. reality tv like toddlers & tiaras and dance moms normalized this. no one batted a eye on those shows when they were just as bad if not worse

Youre talking completely out of your ass.

Every single time this question comes up on Reddit. This is always one of the top responses. heres a couple examples.

https://bit.ly/3ka8emC

https://bit.ly/2ZARLjG

Yall are out of your fucking minds on this one.

---

bknight posted...

and Netflix should be burned to the ground.

this is the part of the narrative i find most telling about the 'cuties outrage' proponents--they're pretty obviously trying to start a fight with a major media source and this is the most available excuse. netflix didn't produce the movie.

these people were silent when it premiered in january, they only care now that the target they want to go after is carrying it.


---

Critical thinking and seeing difficult material passed face value is an extremely tall order for the #SAVETHECHILDREN crowd.

No, clearly the logical explanation is Netflix made a film (they didnt) promoting pedophilia (its not) with the sole purpose of giving pedos spank bank material (let's also pretend they dont already have access to way worse stuff) because....reasons?

Clearly.

darkbuster posted...

The only issue I really have against this movie is that after the campaign against video games & anime, this movie somehow gets a pass. Game characters that are supposed to be adults need to be covered up, anime characters are attacked because they look young, but ACTUAL children twerking is just fine. If this were an anime/manga, it wouldn't be nearly as bad, simply for the fact that it wouldn't have required real children to make, & even if it were, I doubt an anime like this could be unironically produced outside the context of hentai.

Worst of all, it's now become a political position, which means each side is going to dig their heel in with disregard for any actual facts.

Eh, theres a few loli poledancer characters I can think of.

But yeah, the double standards are annoying.

---

This is the best take I've seen of the whole situation

"There had to have been several tryouts, cut scenes and recordings made for this movie, and we have no idea who handled those tapes or where they went after production."

---

LordFarquad1312 posted...

This is the best take I've seen of the whole situation

"There had to have been several tryouts, cut scenes and recordings made for this movie, and we have no idea who handled those tapes or where they went after production."

Its like watching someone make up a story as they tell it, and believing every word.

---